Synthesis: the five inward decisions a proprietary information advantage actually changes

Claim. A proprietary information advantage changes five specific inward decisions, in descending order of evidence strength after independent validation:

1. Pricing — what to charge, by segment, with which fences. Strongest documented support. Anchor domain.
2. Demand & timing — when to staff, buy inventory, bid. Supported but cleanest cases overlap pricing; flag the seam.
3. Risk & exposure — who to extend terms to, which bets to avoid, where to hedge. Well-documented via alt-data credit and Progressive.
4. Retention — who to intervene with, when, on which propensity signal. Capability solid; magnitudes vendor-recycled.
5. Targeting & market selection — where to find the next customers; which segments / territories. Thinnest documented evidence; do not anchor the article here.

Source. Synthesised June 2026 from the source brief's domain validation pass, decomposed against the independent evidence in Research notes (capture-layer): the affirmative, inward decision-edge case for data intelligence — information asymmetry applied to pricing, demand, risk, retention, targeting (June 2026).

Confidence. Industry-consensus for the framework; per-domain evidence labelled at the domain level. Categories are conventional in operations-research and revenue-management practice — the grouping into five is editorial synthesis, not a citation.

Caveats. Targeting & selection is the designated next-pass research target. Consider merging it into Retention (propensity / segmentation) if it cannot be independently sourced. See Gaps: information-asymmetry decision-edge brief (June 2026) — designated next-pass research.

Implication / use. When writing the affirmative article, the spine is "which inward decision does the information change, and what would the uninformed competitor do instead?" — answered five times, with descending confidence. Do not present targeting & selection as parity evidence with pricing.